五四 백화문 운동과 언어 이데올로기 - 對待論적 해석의 가능성 初探

초록

In general, Baihuawen(白話文) movement is represented an evolutionist project which goal was the extinction of traditional writing. Yet, if you read the writings of Hu Shi(胡適) and Lu Xun(魯迅), you could find some inconsistencies. For example, while Baihuawen movement was in a highly-elated atmosphere, Hu Shi got into work of “rearrangement of traditional writings(國故整理)” and Lu Xun revised traditional Wenyan(文言) short-story. To interpret their inconsistency, this essay tries to re-reading on Hu Shi's “historical literary theory” and Lu Xun's “madman diary”. It is hard to say that “historical literary theory” was totally from evolutionist thinking. It seems to be a serious attack to the traditional writing, yet, Hu Shi's criticism aimed at Wenxun-pai(文選派) which was a part of traditional writings. As a result, Hu shi's modern project was linked to the more conservative writing of Dongcheng-pai(東城派). Lu Xun's “madman diary” is a frame story and has no last frame. It means the future is open to the world of Baihua. It is necessary to read his essay collection tomb(墳) to explain “madman diary” more delicately. While Baihua was being institualized, tomb written with Baihua and Wenyan was published. Lu Xun seemed to display the modern condition of writing by publishing tomb. If you pay attention to this point, the prologue of “madman diary” shows to you a different meaning. The Wenyan world is read not a should-be perished thing but the essential background for the future. In sum, it is very hard to explain Hu Shi and Lu Xun's modern language project with the western evolution theory. Then, it is very disserve to note “Duidai theory”(對待論) proposed by Liu Bannong(劉半農). At that time, his “Duidai theory” seemed to have not a strong effect in an intellectual discourse, but, I think it seems an unspoken ideology in the discourses of modern chinese writing.

키워드